# 24. Drama as the Literary Force of the Present

In his stimulating book "Neue Beiträge zur Theorie und Technik der Epik und Dramatik" (Leipzig. 1898), Friedrich Spielhagen discusses, among other things, the dominance that drama exercises in the present. Anyone interested in aesthetic questions will always enjoy reading a theoretical work by Spielhagen. An artist of rich experience, fine thinking and refined taste speaks to us from such a book. A mature, clarified judgment, gained through many years of personal artistic practice, must also be listened to with rapt attention by those who have a different view from the person making the judgment. In general, Friedrich Spielhagen does not speak well of modern dramatic production; in individual cases, he will always be the first to show understanding and appreciation for real talent.

Much of what he says should find unreserved approval even among the most obedient adherents of newer trends. For it is true that today's literary supremacy is based on manifold errors: on errors on the part of the poets, on errors on the part of the public.

One basic error is that one believes one can say everything one wants to say with the means of drama. A deeper aesthetic education, however, will always lead to the recognition of the truth that certain material can only tolerate a novelistic and not a dramatic treatment. Drama cannot tolerate material that is only suitable for novellistic treatment. That is why some modern dramas are only dramatized novellas. Such shortcomings in the material, or in the treatment of a material, result in dramatic structures that leave us unsatisfied because important things are missing that are necessary if we are to fully understand what happens in the course of the dramatic action. And when the playwright endeavors to bring such things, we see on the stage what we cannot tolerate on it. Spielhagen rightly remarks: "The confusion of dramatic with epic art ... occurs ... sometimes comes to light in the most delightful way. Thus in the pettiness of the stage directions in usum of the directors and actors. No small piece of furniture, no coffee cup saucer is given to us. The position of the sun, the atmospheric mood, the scent of flowers wafting through the room - these are all things of immense importance. Each person is given a meticulous description: whether they are long or short, fat or thin; whether their skull is broad or oval, what expression their physiognomy shows when they are at rest or in motion, and that they have this or that habit when walking, standing, speaking or smiling. One would always like to shout to the gentlemen: if these things are so dear to you, why don't you just write novels and novellas where you can indulge in such epic details!"

But for all its addiction to indulging in detail, drama cannot offer the development of characters and actions that epic representation rightly claims for itself. The drama must depict prominent, characteristic moments that coalesce into an artistic whole with a beginning, middle and end. All talk about the unnaturalness of such a whole cannot be convincing. Spielhagen replies to such talk: "I am always reminded of the anecdote of the Jewish butcher who thought he had sharpened his knife without a blade, as required by the ritual, and to whom the wise rabbi showed it under a magnifying glass, where the blade without a blade then appeared like a saw. Engaging in a race with nature is always unfortunate - it has too much staying power. And the matter becomes absurd when the competition is as futile as it is futile. The purposes of nature and art do not coincide now and nowhere. Nature has always done very well without art; and when art is absorbed in imitation of nature, it is nothing more than second-hand and dead-hand nature, of which every panopticon provides gruesome evidence."

There are thus two errors on which much of modern drama is based: the misjudgment of the boundaries between epic and dramatic art and the superstition that nature can really be imitated. These errors are present on the part of the authors.

The public's attitude towards the theater shows no less significant damage. People no longer want to follow the in-depth epic portrayal that lays bare all the links in the development of an event. They want to deal with a problem in a few hours, to be superficially excited by it. One does not seek all-round artistic enjoyment, but a fleeting reference. The tendency towards intensive immersion is decreasing more and more. And the circles that have such an inclination are almost completely excluded from attending the theater by the high theater prices. The fate of a dramatic work of art today depends on factors that cannot decide whether it is of artistic value or not. The following sentences by Spielhagen are only too true: "That intimate relationship that once existed between the audience and the producer (poets and actors), that penetrating understanding that results from constant, heartfelt participation - they are no longer possible, at least in the big cities of today. How could they be, in a constantly changing audience made up of a small number of real lovers and an overwhelmingly large contingent of cool to the core, meditating idlers, coquettish idlers and passing strangers! The most alarming thing is that it is precisely this audience's more than suspicious vote that is decisive for the entire dramatic market. What it approves will make the rounds through all provincial towns, what it rejects will not have a full course anywhere. There are exceptions - I know it well, but it's the rule."

The professional criticism does not have a clarifying and ameliorating effect on these conditions. Today, individual critics are too much under the spell of some aesthetic direction. Only a few are capable of an unbiased dedication to artistic qualities. Most ask whether a work fits in with the ideas they have formed about art. Once again, Spielhagen's characteristic is apt: "For entire critical circles, a state arises like when the table is moved, where the manipulators believe the table to be pushed by a higher power, while they themselves are the pushers under the influence of a quiet pressure that they do not actually perceive, which emanates from the neighbor to the right (or left), who is again influenced by his neighbor to the right (or left) and so on all the way around."

The fact is that all younger poets are pushing towards the stage. The fact that a theater performance is much more readily understood by today's audience than a multi-volume novel is a decisive factor in this push. But there is something else to consider. Art today, like many other branches of life, has taken on a social character. Our dramatists do not want to create merely for aesthetic enjoyment; they want to contribute to the reorganization of social relations. Art should be an element of social development. But since drama has a far stronger effect than the novel, the young choose it. They then see the effect, so to speak, grow up from today to tomorrow. And our time wants to be fast-moving. We want to see what we are contributing to. Hence the favoring of dramatic art by journalism, the state and society, of which Spielhagen speaks: "the favoring that theatrical art receives as a decorative art (just like the fine arts) from above, how many thousands are spent annually on its richer equipment, which then indirectly benefits dramatic production again. How the latter itself is again protected, also from above, as soon as it proves to be compliant with the tendencies popular there, which may not always be beneficial to its salvation, but at least increases its worldly reputation and attracts flocks of people who aspire to higher regions or are obedient to an impulse. How one tries to honor and cheer up production by periodically distributing prizes. How much space it is given in the feature pages of the daily papers. How considerable the number of revues and monthlies devoted entirely to its service. How much the higher classes of the grammar schools are already doing for its understanding by commenting on our classics, by presenting themes on dramatic matters and so on. What eloquent and enthusiastic eulogists and interpreters the dramatic art finds on the cathedrals of the universities."

All this support is given to dramatic art for the reason that it is an important link in social development.